Rogers Media uses cookies for personalization, to customize its online advertisements, and for other purposes. Learn more or change your cookie preferences. Rogers Media supports the Digital Advertising Alliance principles. By continuing to use our service, you agree to our use of cookies.

We use cookies (why?) You can change cookie preferences. Continued site use signifies consent.

Another concept Stephen Harper used to believe in

Stephen Harper, 2008. As well, while investing in the industries and jobs of tomorrow, our government is supporting the traditional industries that have long formed the sturdy foundation of Canada’s economy.

Filed under:

Advertisement

Advertisement

Post navigation

Another concept Stephen Harper used to believe in

That's why Harper announces policy for the NEXT election. He dosen't make any sense at all and just seems to say the complete opposite of what he intends to do…and as for the CRAP ( Conservative Reform Alliance Party) Coalition, Harper is just a Bilderberg member using CRAP to try to get a majority so he can implement the Bilderberg plan in Canada. We already have proof that he has no intention of obeying the rules of Parliment (found guilty of being in contempt).

That's why Harper announces policy for the NEXT election. He dosen't make any sense at all and just seems to say the complete opposite of what he intends to do…and as for the CRAP ( Conservative Reform Alliance Party) Coalition, Harper is just a Bilderberg member using CRAP to try to get a majority so he can implement the Bilderberg plan in Canada. We already have proof that he has no intention of obeying the rules of Parliment (found guilty of being in contempt).

That's a cute article. What a martyr poor Mr. Surette is. This line of reasoning continues to confound me:

"If people don't vote out of disgust, good. That increases the voting weight of his zealous base."

As if Harper is somehow to blame for all the people who do not vote. If 8 Liberals stay home or if 800,000 Liberals stay home, can we please stop suggesting that Harper's hatred of democracy is to blame! If you stop to think for even a moment, it is simply a ridiculous proposal.

So did Harper push through that Bill that says he gets to be dictator for life, and that he doesn't have to face the electorate ever again, so long as we the people don't take to the street and throw him out of 24 Sussex by force?

Look, I know that's not the ONLY expression of democracy in our country, but it remains the ultimate expression of democracy in our country, and if someone truly does stomp and trample all over the other aspects of democracy and abuse their power, than Canadians, I would suggest, will come out in force and kick that person out. If on the other hand, it's simply a bunch of minor things that the opposition obviously shouts more loudly about than is deserved (this is important), then people will seem not to care.

Final thing. Since it's the Liberal voters who are staying home the most, I would suggest that perhaps the Liberal party is to blame, not the Conservative party. Crazy thought, I know, but hey, I simply insist on thinking outside the box! ;)

I would like that to, but the one thing I like the most, is when the party that is most conservative is winning. That way there is a strong chance that society will be moving in a conservative direction, or at the very least, it will move in a leftist direction much more slowly.

I prefer this much more than having a reform type party that loses.

Occasionally I don't like some of the moves by the conservative that are anything but conservative, but at the same time I know what we'd be getting as an alternative. Just watching McGuinty in Ontario is a stark reminder. Think about how, in late 2008, we would have had a stimulus disaster ten times worse had the other parties been running the govt, along the lines with what happened in the US or Europe, where deficits are reaching for the moon. Instead, Harper kept it to a minimum, nearly losing power in the process. Then look at Ontario at how McGunity the Liberal has essentially destroyed Ontario's fiscal position, with deficits to the moon and no hope in sight.

Wells has said on a few occasions that Harper wants to move Canada to the right, in small, increment steps, sometimes one step back, two steps forward. I think he's right.

Harper missed the crash completely, he didn't see it coming and didn't know the numbers. By LUCK, the liberal regulations and banking system saved Harpers butt! When he found out just how smart the liberals were, he ran with it and tried to claim it as his own. He then took the opportunity to spend the 12 Billion dollar Liberal surplus and added on a 56 Billion Conservative deficiet and that makes Harper good at handling the economy?

How are these two statements contradictory? In the first, Harper talks about investing in the jobs of the future as well as supporting traditional industries. In the second, Harper states his support of traditional industries (consistent with the first) and implies Ignatieff only cares about theoretical future jobs and not the economy of here and now. Nowhere does he state he does not care about the industries and jobs of tomorrow.

How are these two statements contradictory? In the first, Harper talks about investing in the jobs of the future as well as supporting traditional industries. In the second, Harper states his support of traditional industries (consistent with the first) and implies Ignatieff only cares about theoretical future jobs and not the economy of here and now. Nowhere does he state he does not care about the industries and jobs of tomorrow.

Obviously anybody who points out anything against the CPC wants them to be defeated.
There is no chance that a person might want the CPC to improve, because as everybaahhdy knows.. they're already perfect.

Obviously anybody who points out anything against the CPC wants them to be defeated.
There is no chance that a person might want the CPC to improve, because as everybaahhdy knows.. they're already perfect.

I would like that to, but the one thing I like the most, is when the party that is most conservative is winning. That way there is a strong chance that society will be moving in a conservative direction, or at the very least, it will move in a leftist direction much more slowly.

I prefer this much more than having a reform type party that loses.

Occasionally I don't like some of the moves by the conservative that are anything but conservative, but at the same time I know what we'd be getting as an alternative. Just watching McGuinty in Ontario is a stark reminder. Think about how, in late 2008, we would have had a stimulus disaster ten times worse had the other parties been running the govt, along the lines with what happened in the US or Europe, where deficits are reaching for the moon. Instead, Harper kept it to a minimum, nearly losing power in the process. Then look at Ontario at how McGunity the Liberal has essentially destroyed Ontario's fiscal position, with deficits to the moon and no hope in sight.

Wells has said on a few occasions that Harper wants to move Canada to the right, in small, increment steps, sometimes one step back, two steps forward. I think he's right.

That's a cute article. What a martyr poor Mr. Surette is. This line of reasoning continues to confound me:

"If people don't vote out of disgust, good. That increases the voting weight of his zealous base."

As if Harper is somehow to blame for all the people who do not vote. If 8 Liberals stay home or if 800,000 Liberals stay home, can we please stop suggesting that Harper's hatred of democracy is to blame! If you stop to think for even a moment, it is simply a ridiculous proposal.

So did Harper push through that Bill that says he gets to be dictator for life, and that he doesn't have to face the electorate ever again, so long as we the people don't take to the street and throw him out of 24 Sussex by force?

Look, I know that's not the ONLY expression of democracy in our country, but it remains the ultimate expression of democracy in our country, and if someone truly does stomp and trample all over the other aspects of democracy and abuse their power, than Canadians, I would suggest, will come out in force and kick that person out. If on the other hand, it's simply a bunch of minor things that the opposition obviously shouts more loudly about than is deserved (this is important), then people will seem not to care.

Final thing. Since it's the Liberal voters who are staying home the most, I would suggest that perhaps the Liberal party is to blame, not the Conservative party. Crazy thought, I know, but hey, I simply insist on thinking outside the box! ;)

What deflection? It's Wherry and gang that have been doing that during the campaign so far. From stupid coalition quotes from a decade ago to this nonsense – all meant to detract from the basic issues. Harper had not nor will he form a coalition. His economic plan also focuses on jobs now. Iggy's doesn't, and he also can't afford it without raising taxes. So, deflect all you want. Those issues won't go away.

Well, yes – actually! If he treated parliament – and Canadians – with respect, we wouldn't be going to the polls now. In fact, he might have gotten his much desired majority in 2008…

KeithBram on April 2, 2011 at 8:18 pm

Based on the posts here, we seem to be having our fourth $300 million election in seven years because some of you can't stand the fact that he keeps winning and you keep losing. He's governed the longest serving minority government in Canadian history. And he's now enduring his second election as prime minister. The idea that we don't have democracy in Canada is ludicrous. Just because you can't stand the guy doesn't mean we don't have democracy. Sorry.

He governed with the "longest serving minority" because he hasn't been able to garner enough votes for a majority. Not necessarily a feat to be proud of; it means not that he's a winner, but that he lost the least. (And yeah, that last line was just to push your buttons,)

I find your choice of phrase "enduring his second election" rather revealing; like an election is really something King Steve should not have to put up with. It's phrases like that that make people like me concerned about the future of our democracy under the CPC.

Yeah, we have a democracy – that's WHY we're having another election. How is it you seem to think elections are anti-democratic?

KeithBram on April 2, 2011 at 9:25 pm

I believe we have our very first 4in7er.

Proud Canadian on April 2, 2011 at 8:51 pm

We are having our fourth 300 million dollar election in 7 years for two reasons.
1. Contempt of Parliment
2. Harper refuses to work with the other parties who represent close to 70% of Canadian voters

Proud Canadian on April 3, 2011 at 9:51 pm

1. You mean "contempt" charges orchestrated by the very opposition that forced the election, and that have not been mentioned since the start of the campaign?

2. How can you accuse of Harper not wanting to work with other parties when he's had their support for over five years – the longest serving minority government in Canadian history.

So far, all I've seen from the opposition is name-calling and resentment.

Again, this is why we're having our fourth $300 million election in seven years?

What deflection? It's Wherry and gang that have been doing that during the campaign so far. From stupid coalition quotes from a decade ago to this nonsense – all meant to detract from the basic issues. Harper had not nor will he form a coalition. His economic plan also focuses on jobs now. Iggy's doesn't, and he also can't afford it without raising taxes. So, deflect all you want. Those issues won't go away.

Harper missed the crash completely, he didn't see it coming and didn't know the numbers. By LUCK, the liberal regulations and banking system saved Harpers butt! When he found out just how smart the liberals were, he ran with it and tried to claim it as his own. He then took the opportunity to spend the 12 Billion dollar Liberal surplus and added on a 56 Billion Conservative deficiet and that makes Harper good at handling the economy?

How about that Nanos poll that shows Harper taking the 905 region and polling at 41 percent…taken after week one.

Cut and paste that.

Oh, and we're told this was a horrible week for Harper and a great one for Iggy. I can't imagine what an "average" week for Iggy would look like, or better yet, a "bad" week. Not to worry though, I'm sure Wherry and his media buddies will be telling us each of the next four weeks will be supreme performances by Iggy….while Harper's numbers start creeping up to the mid forties or even the fifty percent range.

How about that Nanos poll that shows Harper taking the 905 region and polling at 41 percent…taken after week one.

Cut and paste that.

Oh, and we're told this was a horrible week for Harper and a great one for Iggy. I can't imagine what an "average" week for Iggy would look like, or better yet, a "bad" week. Not to worry though, I'm sure Wherry and his media buddies will be telling us each of the next four weeks will be supreme performances by Iggy….while Harper's numbers start creeping up to the mid forties or even the fifty percent range.

Based on the posts here, we seem to be having our fourth $300 million election in seven years because some of you can't stand the fact that he keeps winning and you keep losing. He's governed the longest serving minority government in Canadian history. And he's now enduring his second election as prime minister. The idea that we don't have democracy in Canada is ludicrous. Just because you can't stand the guy doesn't mean we don't have democracy. Sorry.

He governed with the "longest serving minority" because he hasn't been able to garner enough votes for a majority. Not necessarily a feat to be proud of; it means not that he's a winner, but that he lost the least. (And yeah, that last line was just to push your buttons,)

I find your choice of phrase "enduring his second election" rather revealing; like an election is really something King Steve should not have to put up with. It's phrases like that that make people like me concerned about the future of our democracy under the CPC.

Yeah, we have a democracy – that's WHY we're having another election. How is it you seem to think elections are anti-democratic?

Mr. Harper's willingness to lie before the cameras (week to week as with the one-on-one debate; year over year as with the Harper-then vs. Harper-now examples) is the single most damning feature of his approach to campaigning and governing. If Harper would simply stop lying, more people might support him.

However, he's been doing this for years, so I think he might be stuck.

Mr. Harper's willingness to lie before the cameras (week to week as with the one-on-one debate; year over year as with the Harper-then vs. Harper-now examples) is the single most damning feature of his approach to campaigning and governing. If Harper would simply stop lying, more people might support him.

However, he's been doing this for years, so I think he might be stuck.

Notice: Your email may not yet have been verified. Please check your email, click the link to verify your address, and then submit your comment. If you can't find this email, access your profile editor to re-send the confirmation email. You must have a verified email to submit a comment. Once you have done so, check again.

Almost Done!

Please confirm the information below before signing up.

{* #socialRegistrationForm *}
{* socialRegistration_firstName *}
{* socialRegistration_lastName *}
{* socialRegistration_emailAddress *}
{* socialRegistration_displayName *}
By clicking "Create Account", I confirm that I have read and understood each of the website terms of service and privacy policy and that I agree to be bound by them.